There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.


I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level license
system but I think they will be General and Extra. The step from Tech to
General is not that difficult and the licensee will have access to all
modes, power levels and bands. Unless you are into DXing, contesting or
being a VE, the additional privileges that Extra licensees have are not that
much of an advantage.

I, for one, encourage all those studying for Technician to go ahead and get
the General study guide and go for it either at the first sitting or as soon
as possible thereafter. The Technician will be basically turn into a very
temporary way station on their climb up the ladder.

In my opinion, the Technicians who stay at that level will primarily be
those who are inactive.

Dee, N8UZE

On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.


Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. I would advocate
two licenses: a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam. The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out rate.

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine these
two. Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. At this point in time, there are no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level" license.

Dee, N8UZE

On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...





On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. I would advocate
two licenses: a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam. The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out rate.

I disagree. The "top" license, Amateur, should be the current General
exam, and the entry level license, Limited Amateur, should be
something much less.

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine these
two. Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. At this point in time, there are no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level" license.

Why not?

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...





On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license
with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might
add.

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. I would
advocate
two licenses: a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam.
The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic
enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra
is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out
rate.

I disagree. The "top" license, Amateur, should be the current General
exam, and the entry level license, Limited Amateur, should be
something much less.

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine
these
two. Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. At this point in time, there are
no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license
classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person
could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will
be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of
the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level"
license.

Why not?

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.


Not at all. There is such a wide range of enjoyable activities available
that I want people to be able to explore them. For the same reason
(expanding one's range of activities and knowledge base), I've dragged Extra
class licensees over to the VHF station at Field day to show them what can
be achieved on those frequencies. While there are many Extras familiar with
the VHF/UHF possibilities, for some reason the Extras in the club I belong
to it have not really explored them.

With the dropping of the code test requirement, the difference between the
Tech license material and the General license material is just not that
great. In the exam sessions, we actively encourage a person to try the
General when they pass the Tech exam. Those applicants that have chosen to
develop an understanding of the Tech material (i.e. learn the antenna
equation and how to use it rather than memorizing the lengths for the
questions that might occur on the test) usually come within a couple of
points of passing the General. Some would have passed the General if they
had simply known to also memorize the General frequency priviliges along
with the material they already knew.

The material on the Tech and General is straight forward enough that it can
be grasped by just about anyone with a moderate amount of study. If one
looks at it in terms of return (license & range of privileges) versus
investment (study), the General is perfectly reasonable as a first license
step.

On the other hand, let's look at an "entry level" license and exam. You
have got to cover rules, safety (including RF radiation safety), and good
operating practices as a bare minimum. By the time you do this, you've
already got a significant portion of what you would need for a General class
license. Your return (license & privileges) versus investment (study) for
an entry level license, is just not that worthwhile.

Those countries that have folded their two license classes into one class
often had a written test that was equivalent to our Extra not our General
for both and the only differentiating item was the code test. Thus they
really had no "entry" license. They had VHF/UHF licenses and full licenses.
The US has been somewhat unusual in that there is a license (General) that
has a significant range of privileges on all bands with a moderate level
level of testing.

Dee, N8UZE

On Mar 4, 11:38 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license
with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might
add.

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. I would
advocate
two licenses: a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam.
The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic
enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra
is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out
rate.

I disagree. The "top" license, Amateur, should be the current General
exam, and the entry level license, Limited Amateur, should be
something much less.

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine
these
two. Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. At this point in time, there are
no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license
classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person
could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will
be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of
the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level"
license.

Why not?

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

Not at all. There is such a wide range of enjoyable activities available
that I want people to be able to explore them. For the same reason
(expanding one's range of activities and knowledge base), I've dragged Extra
class licensees over to the VHF station at Field day to show them what can
be achieved on those frequencies. While there are many Extras familiar with
the VHF/UHF possibilities, for some reason the Extras in the club I belong
to it have not really explored them.

I was referrign to Code Testing.

With the dropping of the code test requirement, the difference between the
Tech license material and the General license material is just not that
great.

I want you to always remember that you said that. Always.

First, if there is so little difference between the Technician Exam
and the General Exam (sans Morse Code), then you make my point that
the Technician exam is just too advanced for an entry level exam. It
must be simplified.

Second, it was the General Exam that once conveyed ALL AMATEUR
PRIVELEGES. Now you are saying that it is the defacto starting point
because there is no Morse Exam to accompany it? That just smacks of
Code Tested Extra elitism.

Third, the Advanced and Extra Exams have been combined, thereby
dumbing down the Extra, bringing it closer to the present General
Exam, not pushing it toward an MSEE like some of you would like to
think. So if there is so little difference between the Technician and
General Exams, and the Extra has been dumbed down to Advanced level,
why do we still have people wanting more superfluous license classes
that are growing closer together in difficulty allatime?

And in the end, it's still allabout Morse Code with you.

In the exam sessions, we actively encourage a person to try the
General when they pass the Tech exam. Those applicants that have chosen to
develop an understanding of the Tech material (i.e. learn the antenna
equation and how to use it rather than memorizing the lengths for the
questions that might occur on the test) usually come within a couple of
points of passing the General. Some would have passed the General if they
had simply known to also memorize the General frequency priviliges along
with the material they already knew.

Did you say memorize? Wouldn't you rather they understood the
frequency privileges?

The material on the Tech and General is straight forward enough that it can
be grasped by just about anyone with a moderate amount of study. If one
looks at it in terms of return (license & range of privileges) versus
investment (study), the General is perfectly reasonable as a first license
step.

All government testing should be straight forward.

On the other hand, let's look at an "entry level" license and exam. You
have got to cover rules, safety (including RF radiation safety), and good
operating practices as a bare minimum. By the time you do this, you've
already got a significant portion of what you would need for a General class
license. Your return (license & privileges) versus investment (study) for
an entry level license, is just not that worthwhile.

If you remove the RF Safety, and change the power levels below that
required for an RFEA, then you have the makings of a simplified
amateur class.

Those countries that have folded their two license classes into one class
often had a written test that was equivalent to our Extra not our General
for both and the only differentiating item was the code test. Thus they
really had no "entry" license.

I wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. You shouldn't be allowed to
talk about anonymous countries.

They had VHF/UHF licenses and full licenses.
The US has been somewhat unusual in that there is a license (General) that
has a significant range of privileges on all bands with a moderate level
level of testing.

Dee, N8UZE-

The General once conveyed ALL AMATEUR PRIVILEGES.

Sheesh!

On Mar 4, 7:54�am, wrote:
On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

[which the FCC received in 1998, *not* in 2000...]

I disagree. *My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." *However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. *Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. *I would advocate
two licenses: *a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam. *The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. *Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. *It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out rate.

I disagree. *The "top" license, Amateur, should be the current General
exam, and the entry level license, Limited Amateur, should be
something much less.

An ENTRY level license NAME loaded with denigrating
adjectives is not a good way to attract anyone. Using
"novice" or "beginner" or "apprentice" or "tyro" or "newbie"
MIGHT attract a younger teener but is a turn-off to most
anyone over 18. "Limited" might be an "accurate"
adjective but it is still emotionally-loaded as a descriptor.

Even a "tyro" marketing person would have tossed the
"Novice" name in the trash long ago. :-(

If anything, just call the entry class for Entry class...


Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine these
two. *Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. *At this point in time, there are no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level" license.

Why not?

Once upon a time in hamland there was NO "entry level"
by name. One simply jumped in and did it, "learning"
the (oh so) PROPER procedure as they went along.

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

Morsemanship skills could have used an on-air learning
period for many. It was never an intellectual skill but a
psychomotor thing that some had trouble with despite
some saying "oh, no trouble at all for 'me'." :-(

If any ham club wants to have specialized classes on
morsemanship skills, that's fine with me. Those interested
in that can do the classroom thing all they want, then try
it out for real with their radios later. That's the SAME
way one learns theory in classroom environments, then
tries it out on real radio hardware later.

Trying to combine classroom with on-air training by
frequency-restricted, limited privilege license classes
(and the attendant class-distinction) was never a good
thing in my mind.

73, LA

On Mar 4, 1:10 pm, "
wrote:
On Mar 4, 7:54?am, wrote:

On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.

Tech, and Extra.

Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with
all
privileges.

Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.

[which the FCC received in 1998, *not* in 2000...]

Rip Van Deignan... overslept.

I disagree. ?My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.

I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." ?However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. ?Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.

Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. ?I would advocate
two licenses: ?a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam. ?The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. ?Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. ?It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out rate.

I disagree. ?The "top" license, Amateur, should be the current General
exam, and the entry level license, Limited Amateur, should be
something much less.

An ENTRY level license NAME loaded with denigrating
adjectives is not a good way to attract anyone. Using
"novice" or "beginner" or "apprentice" or "tyro" or "newbie"
MIGHT attract a younger teener but is a turn-off to most
anyone over 18. "Limited" might be an "accurate"
adjective but it is still emotionally-loaded as a descriptor.

Even a "tyro" marketing person would have tossed the
"Novice" name in the trash long ago. :-(

If anything, just call the entry class for Entry class...

We could go French and call it the enfante' class.

Or Airman First Class, Airman Second Class, Airman Third Class...

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine these
two. ?Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. ?At this point in time, there are no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level" license.

Why not?

Once upon a time in hamland there was NO "entry level"
by name. One simply jumped in and did it, "learning"
the (oh so) PROPER procedure as they went along.

Jumped in and did it as in NO TESTING.

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

Morsemanship skills could have used an on-air learning
period for many. It was never an intellectual skill but a
psychomotor thing that some had trouble with despite
some saying "oh, no trouble at all for 'me'." :-(

"If I can do it anyone can. And if they can't then they're not
special like me and don't belong..."

If any ham club wants to have specialized classes on
morsemanship skills, that's fine with me. Those interested
in that can do the classroom thing all they want, then try
it out for real with their radios later. That's the SAME
way one learns theory in classroom environments, then
tries it out on real radio hardware later.

Sounds real good to me.

Trying to combine classroom with on-air training by
frequency-restricted, limited privilege license classes
(and the attendant class-distinction) was never a good
thing in my mind.

73, LA- Hide quoted text -

bb

wrote:

...

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. Amateur radio has been driven by a
weird group of "initiation fanatics." Like they are kinda "inducting"
ya into a cult or somethin'. Or, kinda like joinin' the masons. Weird
group who never outgrew high school and college frat initiations into
"secret societies."

Actually, this would be good group for Art Bell to do a show
on--"amateur frat initiates" ... If the pyramids were here in the US,
they'd use them as the "initiation temple." erie music plays here

Me, I just grabbed the mic and set my own style, course never suffered
from "mike fright" here. Never had a strong need to "feel a part of" or
that I needed others to increase my own self worth. Never found the
"official flock of sheep" had that much to offer either.

But hey, to each their own ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com